[Bug 14493] New: Conventional tools for managing ACLs can mislead the user

[Bug 14493] New: Conventional tools for managing ACLs can mislead the user

[samba-bugs]

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14493

            Bug ID: 14493
           Summary: Conventional tools for managing ACLs can mislead the
                    user
           Product: CifsVFS
           Version: 3.x
          Hardware: All
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P5
         Component: kernel fs
          Assignee: sfrench@samba.org
          Reporter: micah.veilleux@iba-group.com
        QA Contact: cifs-qa@samba.org
  Target Milestone: ---

On a client to a Samba share for which Windows ACLs are configured, "ls -l"
reports incorrect information, and no "+" is present to indicate that ACLs have
been configured:
------------------------------
mcrs3:/TCS # ls -lh testfile
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 0 Sep 14 23:05 testfile   # permissions are incorrect,
"+" is missing, and owner and primary group owner are incorrect
mcrs3:/TCS # smbcacls //mcrs3/TCS /testfile -k yes
REVISION:1
CONTROL:SR|DP
OWNER:VPTC3\cifsuser
GROUP:VPTC3\Domain Users
ACL:VPTC3\Domain Admins:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
ACL:VPTC3\cifsuser:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
mcrs3:/TCS #
------------------------------

Still on the client, "chown" and "chmod" fail without error:
------------------------------
mcrs3:/TCS # chown vptc3\\mveil testfile
mcrs3:/TCS # chmod u+x testfile
mcrs3:/TCS #
mcrs3:/TCS # smbcacls //mcrs3/TCS /testfile -k yes
REVISION:1
CONTROL:SR|DP
OWNER:VPTC3\cifsuser
GROUP:VPTC3\Domain Users
ACL:VPTC3\Domain Admins:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
ACL:VPTC3\cifsuser:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
mcrs3:/TCS #
------------------------------

On the server side, these issues are not present:
------------------------------
mcrs3:/.TCS_local # ls -l testfile
-rw-rwx---+ 1 VPTC3\cifsuser VPTC3\domain users 0 Sep 14 23:05 testfile
mcrs3:/.TCS_local #
mcrs3:/.TCS_local # smbcacls //mcrs3/TCS /testfile -k yes
REVISION:1
CONTROL:SR|DP
OWNER:VPTC3\cifsuser
GROUP:VPTC3\Domain Users
ACL:VPTC3\Domain Admins:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
ACL:VPTC3\cifsuser:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
mcrs3:/.TCS_local #
mcrs3:/.TCS_local # chown vptc3\\mveil testfile
mcrs3:/.TCS_local # chmod u+x testfile
mcrs3:/.TCS_local #
mcrs3:/.TCS_local # smbcacls //mcrs3/TCS /testfile -k yes
REVISION:1
CONTROL:SR|DP
OWNER:VPTC3\mveil
GROUP:VPTC3\Domain Users
ACL:VPTC3\mveil:ALLOWED/0x0/FULL
ACL:VPTC3\Domain Users:ALLOWED/0x0/
ACL:VPTC3\Domain Users:ALLOWED/0x0/
ACL:VPTC3\Domain Admins:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
ACL:VPTC3\cifsuser:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
ACL:Everyone:ALLOWED/0x0/
mcrs3:/.TCS_local #
mcrs3:/.TCS_local # ls -l testfile
-rwxrwx---+ 1 VPTC3\mveil VPTC3\domain users 0 Sep 14 23:05 testfile
mcrs3:/.TCS_local #
------------------------------

My sernet-samba version is 99:4.12.2-11.suse150.

My mount is:
------------------------------
mcrs3:/TCS # grep "TCS " /etc/fstab
//mcrs3/TCS /TCS cifs
user=cifsuser,multiuser,domain=VPTC3,sec=krb5,mfsymlinks,vers=3.0 0 0
mcrs3:/TCS #
------------------------------

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

[Bug 14493] Conventional tools for managing ACLs can mislead the user

[samba-bugs]

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14493

--- Comment #1 from Shyam Prasad N <nspmangalore@gmail.com> ---
Hi Micah,
If you're expecting translation of unix perm bits to ACLs, you need to use the
"cifsacl" mount option. Can you try that and see if it helps for you?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

[Bug 14493] Conventional tools for managing ACLs can mislead the user

[samba-bugs]

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14493

--- Comment #2 from Micah Veilleux <micah.veilleux@iba-group.com> ---
Thanks Shyam, you're right.  The results with the "cifsacl" mount option are
still problematic.  My mount options are now:
------------------------------
mcrw1:/TCS # grep "TCS " /etc/fstab
//mcrs3/TCS /TCS cifs
user=cifsuser,multiuser,domain=VPTC3,sec=krb5,iocharset=utf8,cifsacl,mfsymlinks,nobrl,vers=3.0
0 0
mcrw1:/TCS #
------------------------------

The "+" is still missing from the output of "ls -l":
------------------------------
mcrw1:/TCS # smbcacls //mcrs3/TCS /testfile -k yes
REVISION:1
CONTROL:SR|DP
OWNER:VPTC3\cifsuser
GROUP:VPTC3\Domain Users
ACL:VPTC3\Domain Admins:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
ACL:VPTC3\cifsuser:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
mcrw1:/TCS #
mcrw1:/TCS # ls -l testfile
-rw------- 1 VPTC3\cifsuser VPTC3\domain users 0 Sep 15 16:49 testfile   #
permissions are ok, owner and primary group owner are ok, but no "+" is present
to indicate the use of extended ACLs
mcrw1:/TCS #
------------------------------

"chown" fails with error:
------------------------------
mcrw1:/TCS # chown vptc3\\mveil testfile 
chown: changing ownership of 'testfile': Input/output error
mcrw1:/TCS # smbcacls //mcrs3/TCS /testfile -k yes 
REVISION:1
CONTROL:SR|DP
OWNER:VPTC3\cifsuser       # no ownership change made, but at least an error
was reported
GROUP:VPTC3\Domain Users
ACL:VPTC3\Domain Admins:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
ACL:VPTC3\cifsuser:ALLOWED/0x0/RWDPO
mcrw1:/TCS #
------------------------------

"chmod" makes correct changes to the target user, but also incorrect changes to
other users:
------------------------------
mcrw1:/TCS # chmod u+x testfile
mcrw1:/TCS # smbcacls //mcrs3/TCS /testfile -k yes
REVISION:1
CONTROL:SR|DP
OWNER:VPTC3\cifsuser
GROUP:VPTC3\Domain Users
ACL:VPTC3\cifsuser:ALLOWED/0x0/FULL             # permissions changed as
expected
ACL:VPTC3\Domain Users:ALLOWED/0x0/0x00120088   # permissions set
unintentionally for "Domain Users", and removed unintentionally for "Domain
Admins"
ACL:Everyone:ALLOWED/0x0/0x00120088             # permissions set
unintentionally
mcrw1:/TCS #
------------------------------

"ls -l" now reports updated information, which is correct within the limits of
what it can convey, though the "+" is of course still missing:
------------------------------
mcrw1:/TCS # ls -l testfile
-rwx------ 1 VPTC3\cifsuser VPTC3\domain users 0 Sep 15 16:49 testfile
mcrw1:/TCS #
------------------------------

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.